Four Autograph Letters Concerning the Pueblo Revolt of 1680
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Four Autograph Letters Concerning the Pueblo Revolt of 1680 Biblioteca Nacional de México, Archivo Franciscano, caja 20, expediente 432 Edited by Barbara De Marco and Jerry R. Craddock University of California, Berkeley Published under the auspices of the Cíbola Project Research Center for Romance Studies Institute of International Studies University of California, Berkeley Facsimiles published with the permission of Dirección General del Patrimonio Universitario Instituto de Investigaciones Bibliográficas Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Biblioteca Nacional de México and Archivo General de la Nación, México Preface The four letters edited here have in common their subject matter, the Pueblo Revolt of 1680, and their recipient, fray Domingo Noriega, Franciscan commissary for New Spain. The first letter (fol. 1r), dated August 31, 1680, is from fray Juan Álvarez, guardian of the convent of the Manso Indians at El Paso; the remaining three, from fray Francisco de Ayeta, procurador general of the Franciscan missions of New Mexico, are dated August 31 (fol. 2r-v), September 11 (fol. 3r-v), both from El Paso, and December 20, 1680 (fols. 4r-7v), from a place called Real Chico. All the letters are originals, properly signed with rubrics. The first three were not included in the documents pertaining to the Pueblo Revolt that were translated Hackett and Shelby (1942); they did include the last, and by far the most interesting (1942:212-217), though they give as their source Archivo General de Indias (henceforth AGI), Audiencia de Guadalajara, legajo 138 (under the former shelf number 67-3-32). We have been unable to find the letter in that legajo (see De Marco and Craddock 2017:3, n. 1). Hackett and Shelby were working from transcripts rather than from the original documents, which may account for the error of attribution. The text presented here is a transcription of the signed and rubricated originals, which should in any case take precedence over any existing copies. A copy of this fourth letter is found in Archivo General de la Nación, México, Historia, vol. 25, fols. 173v-178r (henceforth Hist25). The first brief letter expresses the dismay of fray Juan Álvarez upon receiving news of the Pueblo Revolt, which included the report of the death Governor’s Otermín, which turned out to be untrue, and of the widespread destruction of the New Mexican settlements, which was all too true. The author laments above all that he was not vouchsafed a glorious martyrdom like so many of his Franciscan brethren (of whom twenty-one perished in the Revolt; see De Marco and Craddock 2017, §16). The first two of the three letters from Fr. Ayeta to the Franciscan commissary bristle with many difficult readings and sometimes appear to veer off into incomprehensibility. Ayeta also wrote letters to the viceroy on August 31 and September 11 (edited by De Marco and Craddock 2017, §§1, 17); the two transcribed below bearing the same dates may have been dashed off after the lengthy letters to the viceroy during a flurry of feverish activity. In his September 11 letter to Fr. Noriega, Ayeta mentions that he is including a copy of the letter to the viceroy (fol. 3r3-6 “La me- | jora de noticias la sabra d’esa | copia simple del thestimonio que | remito a su excelencia”). Unfortunately, the texts of the letters to the viceroy do nothing to elucidate the difficulties of the letters to the Franciscan commissary. What we have been able to make of these two letters in question is the following: The letter of August 31 reflects a time when all seemed lost. It contains, primarily, appeals to Noriega to favor the survivors in El Paso with his prayers. Ayeta also requests instructions as to how he should carry on his work in El Paso, and, curious detail, asks that a captain Zetú send him a cloak (“sayal”) that he had requested. In the letter of September 11, Ayeta announces his intention to travel to Mexico City to confer with the viceroy and his council, since, he writes, letters cannot reply to refutations, whereas Ayeta in person may be able to persuade with counter arguments. He also asks his Franciscan superior for an letter of appointment of a “prelado”, i.e., a custodio for New Mexico. The space for the name of the appointee is to be left blank; Ayeta will fill that in with the name of the candidate of his choice. This is evidently an emergency measure, a necessary precaution, given the slowness of communications between El Paso and Mexico City. 1 The final letter of the collection is carefully written, presumably by Ayeta himself, since it lacks any secretary’s signature at the end, and the text is perfectly coherent. It begins with a lively account of a dramatic incident: Ayeta, wishing to expedite the sending of supplies to the survivors of the Revolt, attempted to cross the Rio Grande in a fully loaded supply wagon drawn by six mules when the river was running high water. The wagon foundered and Ayeta and his mules were nearly drowned. Bystanders rescued them and the supplies were thereafter ferried over the river on the backs of individual mules. The event was recorded by the governor Antonio de Otermín in a letter to the viceroy dated September 18, 1680 (cf. Sempere and Bacich 2017:128-129) and recalled by Ayeta in his 1693 retrospective report on the Revolt (cf. De Marco 2000:464). After this adventure, Ayeta spent 15 days encamped with Otermín and his company, as further refugees arrived, in lamentable condition. The remainder of the letter concerns the decision to make a stand in El Paso with the intention of recovering the lost province of New Mexico as soon as possible. It details the many practical considerations regarding the necessary provisions for the survivors until such an expedition should be feasible. The autograph letter of December 20 has been collated with the copy mentioned above (Hist25), see the table placed after the transcription. The copy shows a good number of significant variants, most of which are reflected in the translation of Hackett and Shelby 1942. The transcription they utilized must have been taken from Hist25 directly or perhaps from its source, another copy as yet unidentified. Facsimiles of Hist25 have been provided to illustrate the variants recorded in the collation. Editorial Criteria The transcription of the Spanish text maintains the orthography and the appearance (marginalia and other emendations) of the original text, except that the abbreviations have been resolved tacitly. Editorial deletions are enclosed in parentheses (. .), editorial emendations and additions in brackets, [. .]; scribal deletions are signaled with a caret inside the parentheses (^ . .), scribal emendations and additions with a caret inside the brackets [^ . .]. Parentheses that actually occur in the text are represented with the special characters “¥... ¦” to differentiate them from editorial deletions. Curly brackets enclose descriptive terms: {rubric}; square brackets also enclose information about format: [left margin], [right margin], etc. The text of marginalia is set off in italics. The line breaks of the manuscript have been maintained, with the exception of marginalia, where line breaks are indicated by a bar (|). The lines are numbered to facilitate references. The editors have systematized the use of the letters u and v, the former for the vowel, and the latter for the consonant. Cedillas are omitted when redundant, that is, before the vowels I and e; conversely, they are added when required, before a, o, and u. The sporadic omission of the tilde over ñ is silently corrected. Punctuation has been adjusted to modern norms, primarily to assist in the comprehension of text. Capitalization has been regularized: proper names of persons and places are set in caps: Consejo de Yndias, Rio de Guadalquivir, Nuevo ~ Nueva Mexico, Barbola ~ Barbara, Joan ~ Juan); names of pueblos are capitalized: La Nueva Tlaxcala, Piastla; names of tribes are not: la nacion concha (but Rio de las Conchas). Dios (Señor when referring to God) is capitalized as well as terms of direct address (Vuestra Señoria, Vuestra Merced). Word division has been adapted to modern usage, with certain exceptions: agglutinations of prepositions with definite articles and personal pronouns (del ‘de el’, dello ‘de ello’, deste ‘de este’, etc.), and agglutinations with the conjunction que, which are signaled with an apostrophe (ques ‘que es’, transcribed as qu’es). Scribal R, that is, capital R, is transcribed according to a specific set of norms: R is retained only for proper names (Rio de las 2 Conchas); otherwise, at the beginning of words it is transcribed r: recibir, relacion, religiosos; within words, R is transcribed as rr, in accordance with Spanish phonology, that is, scribal R invariably corresponds to the trill /rr/ (algarroba, gorrillas, hierro) and never to the flap /r/ (scribal r): (fueron, Gregorio). Illegible portions of the text are signaled with “??” and dubious readings with yellow highlighting. The editors would be grateful for any assistance in resolving such difficulties. References Del Río, Ignacio. 1975. Guía del Archivo Franciscano de la Biblioteca Nacional de México. Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. De Marco, Barbara. 2000. “Voices from the Archives, II: Francisco de Ayeta’s Retrospective on the 1680 Pueblo Revolt.” Romance Philology 53:449-508. Available for purchase at http://www.brepols.net/Pages/BrowseBySeries.aspx?TreeSeries=RPH De Marco, Barbara, and Jerry R. Craddock. 2017. Documents from the Early Days of the Pueblo Revolt of 1680. http://escholarship.org/uc/item/4v34d0nw DRAE = Diccionario de la Real Academia Española. http://dle.rae.es/?w=diccionario Hackett, Charles W., ed. and Charmion C. Shelby, trans. 1942. Revolt of the Pueblo Indians of New Mexico and Otermín's Attempted Reconquest 1680-1682.